IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v22y2020i5p1515-1529.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equilibrium opacity in ultimatum‐offer bargaining

Author

Listed:
  • Kai A. Konrad
  • Marcel Thum

Abstract

We consider ultimatum bargaining between a seller and a buyer of an asset. They know each other's valuation of the asset. Both can defer their decisions to delegates. These delegates have opaque preferences. Seller and buyer choose the opacity of their delegate. For the seller's delegate this choice is restricted to a random reservation price drawn from the set of symmetric two‐point distributions around the seller's true reservation price. The opacity choice of the buyer's delegate is restricted to a random willingness‐to‐pay drawn from the set of symmetric two‐point distribution around the buyer's true willingness‐to‐pay. We characterize the set of pure‐strategy equilibria in their delegation choices. Multiple equilibria arise. Except for two corner solutions, both players will exploit the strategy of opacity. A large set of efficient equilibria exist. For these, opacity choices do not reduce the probability of transacting, but benefit the buyer compared with the no‐delegation equilibrium. We also study the robustness of the results with respect to the player's ability to also resort to a tougher delegate in addition to the opacity choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai A. Konrad & Marcel Thum, 2020. "Equilibrium opacity in ultimatum‐offer bargaining," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1515-1529, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:22:y:2020:i:5:p:1515-1529
    DOI: 10.1111/jpet.12471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12471
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jpet.12471?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tore Ellingsen & Topi Miettinen, 2008. "Commitment and Conflict in Bilateral Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1629-1635, September.
    2. Alexander Wolitzky, 2012. "Reputational Bargaining With Minimal Knowledge of Rationality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(5), pages 2047-2087, September.
    3. Dilip Abreu & Faruk Gul, 2000. "Bargaining and Reputation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 85-118, January.
    4. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2019. "Information Design: A Unified Perspective," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 44-95, March.
    5. Anne-Katrin Roesler & Balázs Szentes, 2017. "Buyer-Optimal Learning and Monopoly Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(7), pages 2072-2080, July.
    6. Emir Kamenica & Matthew Gentzkow, 2011. "Bayesian Persuasion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2590-2615, October.
    7. Fershtman, Chaim & Kalai, Ehud, 1997. "Unobserved Delegation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 38(4), pages 763-774, November.
    8. Levent Koçkesen & Efe A. Ok, 2004. "Strategic Delegation By Unobservable Incentive Contracts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(2), pages 397-424.
    9. Raphael Boleslavsky & Christopher Cotton, 2018. "Limited capacity in project selection: competition through evidence production," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(2), pages 385-421, March.
    10. Kennan, John & Wilson, Robert, 1993. "Bargaining with Private Information," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 45-104, March.
    11. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    12. John Fingleton, 2005. "Career Concerns of Bargainers," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 179-204, April.
    13. Kai A. Konrad & Marcel Thum, 2014. "Climate Policy Negotiations with Incomplete Information," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 81(322), pages 244-256, April.
    14. Li, Duozhe, 2011. "Commitment and compromise in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 203-211, February.
    15. Jones, Stephen R. G., 1989. "Have your lawyer call my lawyer : Bilateral delegation in bargaining situations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 159-174, March.
    16. Ellingsen, Tore & Miettinen, Topi, 2014. "Tough negotiations: Bilateral bargaining with durable commitments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 353-366.
    17. Burtraw, Dallas, 1992. "Strategic delegation in bargaining," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 181-185, February.
    18. Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson, 1983. "Bargaining under Incomplete Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 835-851, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rabah Amir & Myrna Wooders, 2021. "Introduction to the special issue on markets, policies, and economic design: Theory and experiments," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(5), pages 765-771, October.
    2. Kai A. Konrad & Marcel Thum, 2021. "The better route to global tax coordination: Gradualism or multilateralism?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 793-811, May.
    3. Julian Lamprecht & Marcel Thum, 2022. "Opacity in Bargaining over Public Good Provision," CESifo Working Paper Series 9871, CESifo.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schotter, Andrew & Zheng, Wei & Snyder, Blaine, 2000. "Bargaining Through Agents: An Experimental Study of Delegation and Commitment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 248-292, February.
    2. Chung, Bobby W. & Wood, Daniel H., 2019. "Threats and promises in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 37-50.
    3. Ellingsen, Tore & Miettinen, Topi, 2014. "Tough negotiations: Bilateral bargaining with durable commitments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 353-366.
    4. Miettinen, Topi & Perea, Andrés, 2015. "Commitment in alternating offers bargaining," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 12-18.
    5. Gottardi, Piero & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2020. "Mediation Design," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1248, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    6. Bradley J Larsen, 2021. "The Efficiency of Real-World Bargaining: Evidence from Wholesale Used-Auto Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(2), pages 851-882.
    7. Christoph SchottmÑŒller, 2019. "Welfare optimal information structures in bilateral trade," Working Paper Series in Economics 98, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    8. Schottmüller, Christoph, 2023. "Optimal information structures in bilateral trade," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(1), January.
    9. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2019. "Information Design: A Unified Perspective," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 44-95, March.
    10. Andrés Abeliuk & Gerardo Berbeglia & Pascal Van Hentenryck, 2015. "Bargaining Mechanisms for One-Way Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-21, September.
    11. Suehyun Kwon, 2018. "Selling Complementary Goods: Information and Products," CESifo Working Paper Series 7394, CESifo.
    12. Eduardo Perez‐Richet & Vasiliki Skreta, 2022. "Test Design Under Falsification," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 1109-1142, May.
    13. Eso, Peter & Wallace, Chris, 2016. "Persuasion and Pricing : Dynamic Trading with Hard Evidence," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 24, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    14. Shih-Tang Su & Vijay G. Subramanian, 2022. "Order of Commitments in Bayesian Persuasion with Partial-informed Senders," Papers 2202.06479, arXiv.org.
    15. Dutta, Rohan & Ishii, Ryosuke, 2016. "Dynamic commitment games, efficiency and coordination," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 699-727.
    16. Peter C. Cramton, 1992. "Strategic Delay in Bargaining with Two-Sided Uncertainty," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 59(1), pages 205-225.
    17. Kai A. Konrad & Marcel Thum, 2018. "Does a Clean Development Mechanism Facilitate International Environmental Agreements?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(4), pages 837-851, April.
    18. Roberto Serrano, 2007. "Bargaining," Working Papers 2007-06, Instituto Madrileño de Estudios Avanzados (IMDEA) Ciencias Sociales.
    19. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Helland, Leif & Våge Knutsen, Magnus, 2022. "The power of outside options in the presence of obstinate types," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 454-468.
    20. Mark Armstrong & Jidong Zhou, 2022. "Consumer Information and the Limits to Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(2), pages 534-577, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:22:y:2020:i:5:p:1515-1529. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.